M
MBLOCH
Member
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
Recently I've been reading the literature on the best technology to 3D print dental models.
At the lab we have been using Phrozen mighty 8k LCD printers. Practically they have been great, with impressive surface finishes and even less problems associated with remakes in comparison to my past experience using DLP printers.
According to the literature —which extends over a decade to as recent as may of 2024 — polyjet printing, DLP, and SLA are the only printing methods suitable to meet the the clinically acceptable minimum of <120 microns deviation to the reference scan model for prosthodontic restorations." For prosthodontic application, the tolerance level is 120 µm which is the clinical limit of the marginal gap of a restoration "
Polyjet ranked the most accurate consistently and DLP, SLA marginally behind.
LCD falls behind in each of these studies , not meeting the minimum of <120 microns of deviation minimum for suitable prosthodontic use. And readers are advised to use LCD printers with caution.
The methodologies are similar and involves testing trueness and precision of the printed models against the reference scan. All with standardized printing settings and calibrations along with post processing techniques.
I will post the links to a few studies and you can choose to read in further detail: study 1, study 2 , study 3
Of course, after reading this I am left feeling apprehensive and as if I have just accommodated an unideal workflow which leaves improved results on the table. So I wanted to ask the community here what you guys think of this in the face of potential positive current results with your LCD printers, maybe specifically phrozen LCD printers.
Has anyone measured your LCD printer's results against the alternative Polyjet, DLP, SLA options? Is the superior level of surface detail on my phrozen mighty 8K an indication that the dimensional accuracy is also superior? Or how has anyone measured those factors against the other options?
At the lab we have been using Phrozen mighty 8k LCD printers. Practically they have been great, with impressive surface finishes and even less problems associated with remakes in comparison to my past experience using DLP printers.
According to the literature —which extends over a decade to as recent as may of 2024 — polyjet printing, DLP, and SLA are the only printing methods suitable to meet the the clinically acceptable minimum of <120 microns deviation to the reference scan model for prosthodontic restorations." For prosthodontic application, the tolerance level is 120 µm which is the clinical limit of the marginal gap of a restoration "
Polyjet ranked the most accurate consistently and DLP, SLA marginally behind.
LCD falls behind in each of these studies , not meeting the minimum of <120 microns of deviation minimum for suitable prosthodontic use. And readers are advised to use LCD printers with caution.
The methodologies are similar and involves testing trueness and precision of the printed models against the reference scan. All with standardized printing settings and calibrations along with post processing techniques.
I will post the links to a few studies and you can choose to read in further detail: study 1, study 2 , study 3
Of course, after reading this I am left feeling apprehensive and as if I have just accommodated an unideal workflow which leaves improved results on the table. So I wanted to ask the community here what you guys think of this in the face of potential positive current results with your LCD printers, maybe specifically phrozen LCD printers.
Has anyone measured your LCD printer's results against the alternative Polyjet, DLP, SLA options? Is the superior level of surface detail on my phrozen mighty 8K an indication that the dimensional accuracy is also superior? Or how has anyone measured those factors against the other options?